The nature of matter
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 янв 2016
- If there’s one thing that we think we understand, it’s matter. After all, matter makes up everything around us; it even makes up you. However, all is not as it seems. Over the last century, scientists have learned about the building blocks of matter, starting with atoms. It turns out that matter is very different than you think. In this video, Fermilab’s Dr. Don Lincoln will give you an entirely new way to think about the world around us. You will never think of the universe in the same way again.
Наука
![DRAGON BALL: Sparking! ZERO - Fused Warriors Trailer [BUDOKAI TENKAICHI Series]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/84p4Lvyfyes/mqdefault.jpg)
I already knew i was empty inside but thank you for agreeing with me
Me Too
Uuh, what a legend...
آ پ نے بالکل درست کہا۔
مہربانی کر کے نیچے دئیے گئے لنک پر کلک ضرور کریں اور لگے ہاتھوں سبسکرائب بھی کر دیں -
ruclips.net/video/M_4Z0AEzHfw/видео.html میں نے آپ کے جینل کو سبکرائب کرلیا آپ بھی میرے چینل کو سبکرائب کریں شکریہ
😂
The emptiness of matter was the first thing that truly surprised me, as very young physics students. Going into detail, it was the explanation of the experiment conducted by Ernest Rutherford with a radioactivity source, a gold foil and a fluorescent screen.
Great explanation as always, Dr. Lincoln. Thank you!
I eat almost entirely empty space and still keep gaining weight...
Well....the weight you are gaining is almost entirely empty space ...
Ruslan Kazimov That made me laugh 😂...my eyes don’t see empty space though 🤔
Hahahahaha. Thanks 4 the joke. This 1 really got me
You are gaining forcefields or fatfields to be exact. You own personal forcefield to keep you warm at night.
Just gaining more empty space
how can one not love science. thanks for the knowledge. I feel more enlightened now.
user you could be religious. Then you are scared if critical thinking.
There are 5 natures of matter right???
It is important to understand these hidden but fundamental truths about reality. It helps oh so very much that Dr. Lincoln can express them to the world in simple but concise English.
He's right, this stuff is fantastic. It forces you to break down your intuitions that you have naturally built up about the world. It can be tough, slow going, but very rewarding. It gets even more fun when you start looking into what the "size" even means when it comes to objects at the quantum scale. There's always more to learn, which is great!
Outstanding!!!
I started enjoying Physics more, when started watching to Dr. Lincoln's videos. Basically I'm a Biologist, still always love to watch Physics because him. He makes even the most complicated physics to be easily understood by a common man. Thanks Dr. Lincoln.
Thank you Don. Public elementary schools I hope promote access to this quality work during school time.
You should follow this up by showing why we actually see this empty space as specific colors and why we see through certain solids. Just to tie it all together.
Thought provoking! Thank you very much.
Yea!!!!!!!!!!!! I was waiting for those numbers. Thank you for that information and as always, keep them coming.
thank you, Dr. Don I learned new today it did blow my mind.
Just started getting into Don's videos. Great stuff.
Simplicity of expression is very good with this video .
Kind of a comforting thought. The next time I get on the scales I will think: No problem: 99.999999999% is just nothing.
THANK YOU PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!
Thank you for blowing my mind on a regular basis!💡
Truthfully my favourite video on RUclips to date!
Outstanding,
Expertly explained. Well done.
Great show! thank you!
This is one of those videos channels I click the like button scroll up then scroll down to click it again when I realize I click the like button already
Growing up my step-dad said "Boy..., you got an empty head"
I didn't realize he was talking scientifically.
awesome!
I really don’t know about this topic enough to discuss as I only briefly read about golden foil experiment with alpha particles… and wondered how are we sure that charge is not affecting our statistics? What if we confused nucleus size with the place where forces (attraction with orbiting electrons) cancel out? In other words I am saying that my first impression is that trajectory of particles does’t have to be perfectly straight even for the particles which are passing through the foil.
hats off to ur work.... 👍
thanks Doctor I appreciate the deep knowledge.
You are a fantastic teacher
This is such an eye-opener wow! It is not the way we were taught, therefore the concept is new to me.
It’s so clear! Thanks!
We can't push our hands into solids not of the repelling electric fields, but as ordinary as due to matter only ( without empty space ) .
This is due to fact that , our hand cannot get into solids because the spaces between solids molecules is large ( as doc said ) but not that much large in comparison to our hands .
Great video!
Thanks!
Love your videos! BTW there is quite a bit of microphone noise (I'm not referring to the sound effects -- turn up the volume around 4:52 for example and you'll hear what I'm talking about).
Did physics at a sort of high school in Europe. Was completely bored by it, but since I follow Fermilab I love the ideas.
excellent videos on your channel !
"Even though the atom is empty, it's filled up." Okay.......
You should make those "force fields" (aka electron orbitals) look fuzzier so they can overlap. Then mention the Pauli exclusion principle, which is what really prevents atoms from getting closer to each other.
I think Particle Accelerators are wonderful tools for exploring our world. I also read somewhere that a particle accelerator is a machine that turns your tax dollars into a small beam of atomic particles. Keep the videos coming Don!
I recently came to this conclusion after reading a book on basic chemistry, it blew my mind.
Thanks for that it help me very well
OMG.
totaly blows my mind.
Good sir
That atom sound is spooky as hell
Another great video - but too short! you made me so interested, and then it stopped. Guess I'll just have to watch the next one!
Always leave them begging for more...
I realize it is kinda off topic but does anyone know of a good place to stream newly released tv shows online?
@Blaine Trenton I watch on flixzone. Just search on google for it =)
Super class .I like ur class 😻
The same can be said for the interior volume of the Hadrons, too
Gravity blows our minds!
Except that matter is even weirder than that. The electron is not like a planet orbiting the sun, but more like a cloud surrounding the nucleus. They don't really have a definite position.
Even stranger than that, modern particle physics states that particles do not have a definite size. They are like mathematical points which interact with different quantum fields. That interaction is what gives particles their impact. So again, marbles are a poor representation of particles.
So atoms are not "mostly empty space." The reality is even stranger than that.
I think he _knows_ this ... this is the starting off point for getting into that thinking ...
I think Dr. Lincoln is aware of all that, and some more. It's just that he's also an educator, recognizing that the simplified example he has chosen is likely more approachable than something more accurate but also more complex of a description. He even foresees comments like yours (ref. "purists") in the following seconds of this other, related Fermilab clip : ruclips.net/video/x8grN3zP8cg/видео.html
I have a question, what about the gases? They also have a force field, right? Do mine and their force fields not repel as much because in gases the atoms are not as packed up as in solid state?
So, basically what you are saying is that we are pretty much nothing more than a lot of empty space---with anxiety.
on lightspeed electron drugs!
Thanks for the video...But please explain me why electric force is both attractive and repulsive? and why magnetic forces only deflecting? Is there any rocket science in it or merely field line explanation is enough?
love your videos
Really mind blowing. But Dr, if if we have it wrong about reality, we are still right not to walk against walls, except for being crazy.
What is it that gives even a nucleus "volume" if not just more forces? It's fields, numbers and empty space all the way down.
Nice i am so glade on clicked on this video. wow
I Told my my girl after watching this video she was nothing but empty space and she slapped me on the face . That proves another thing. Science is really rough sometimes!!
Don't worry; she didn't physically touch your atoms. Instead, she simply exchanged energy with your face through the photon field!
@@Mysoi123 indeed..
I didn't know shit like this. You amaze me sir and you deserve my respect. Now I'm subscribing... ❤️❤️
Hey, could you guys make a video on the nature of Alcatraz Matter next?
Very cool as always. Could you explain the mechanics of Quantum Tunneling. I know the effect, but I'm interested in the choice of the word Tunneling. Do you mean through the Scalar field or Quantum foam? Aren't they the same thing? I'm guessing it tunnels through that sea of engergy below planck's length, but how can information pass that boundary?
+NeonsStyle
The thing doing the tunneling tunnels through a potential barrier. Consider a mountain range you want to cross. It would take a lot of energy to climb over the mountains, but it's been a long day and you're tired and you just don't have the energy to do that. Fortunately for you, there's a tunnel through the mountain that you can use to get to the other side without spending all that energy.
Similarly, can sometimes get over potential barriers even if they don't have the energy to do so in the usual fashion. Quantum particles are fuzzy, and don't have precise locations; they are sort of smeared out. That let's them have a very small probability of suddenly appearing on the other side of a barrier they normally couldn't cross. That's called tunneling by analogy with real tunnels.
Why do the same force fields sometimes attract and sometimes repel? The atoms of you are stuck together, and the atoms of the wall are stuck together, but you don't merge with the wall when you walk into it (at low speed), so the atoms of you and the atoms of the wall repel each other.
Thanks'
Indeed a epiphany moment.
Always I wanted to know this fact, I like quantum physics like listening to music
May the force (field) be with me !
I had already figured this. But thanks.
Dear Sir, Can you make a video about what really happens when you "touch" something? there are plenty of videos on the topic, but none are satisfying/accrurate. Some say it is due to pauli exclusion principle, other say its plain old repulsion of electrons.. I'm also interested in why the touching "doesn't feel like a force" i.e., there is no springiness to the force. For example, take a block of iron, after touching it, it exerts maybe thousands of pounds of force against compression, but just before touching, the force is practically zero. It seems very discontinuous to be a proper force. i would have expected it to be more like a compressed spring.
So what happens to a solid's "force fields" in a neutron star? Can it be called just a really dense solid or is it a different form of matter?
The interior volume of the neutrons is still empty, just each neutron is held together by chromodynamic forces.
In neutron stars, the larger electromagnetic force fields of protons and electrons is compressed away by gravity. The strong forcefield remains
One of the the craziest conclusions about this is how dense the nucleus is. All of our weight is just in 0,0000001% of our volume. That's how black hole and neutron stars can get ultra dense, the strong gravity defeats the other forces and thus create a real conglomeration of particles with little to no space between them.
😮 🤩 wow
I really like it when I understand something scientific.
Oppositely charged plates have electric field b/w them which is a force field, but it allows matter to pass thru.
So, are these force fields negatively charged so that they repel each other when in contact with each other (like a magnet)?
+ScienceNinjaDude I still don't quite understand. If there are electric force fields that repel the electric charge of other atoms, surely they have either positive or negative charge? I'm a bit confused😐
+ScienceNinjaDude +ScienceNinjaDude OK, thanks 👍 so why do they interact with each other? Isn't it because it's negative electrons vs other negative electrons, so they repel each other?
+ScienceNinjaDude Thanks for explaining it to me 😀 I'm trying to learn more about physics.
+ScienceNinjaDude Agreed :) thx
When atoms bond they share electrons. It is the attraction to the positively charged protons of these electrons that makes matter solid.
is this force, the electro-magnetic force or the strong interaction force?
Oh Hell Yeah, my mind is blown
What about the gluon interactions, and virtual particle pairs annihilating, everywhere?
The topic of this video reminds me of the fact that I would have made a good astronaut; all I did in school was take up space.
whoa
Who does the animation of subatomic particles and atoms?
Hehe...i already knew that so the force field(s) composing my brain is not yet penetre...blown away. Nice video anyway.
Thanks John Cleese
Yep!!!
Dr Don, shouldn't you have explained how a 'force' field works? Do virtual particles exchange photons?
A question: why did matter particles form from the early hot particle soup right after the Big Bang?
I recently interpreted from a book discussion that matter particles are a result of cosmic inflation separating virtual particle and anti-particle partners before they could annihilate at a time when matter particles where favored over anti-matter. The virtual particles as a result became 'real' particles (with rest mass?) when they were so rapidly separated. I think of this as a similar process to Hawking radiation where one virtual (anti-)particle falls into the black hole while the other escapes and transforms the black holes gravitational energy into 'mass energy' and thus becomes a 'real' particle, shrinking the black hole.
Is this an accepted hypothesis to why matter particles formed from the early universe? Is the Hawking radiation analogy applicable? Thanks.
+ScienceNinjaDude Ah, helpful, thank you. I think my quarry may be more fundamental than dealing with matter or antimatter, though; a better wording might be: why is there matter at all (whether anti or normal)? Why would the universe not be a uniform distribution of energy? Why the 'clumping' into matter? The excerpt from Universe From Nothing is the first I've read of a potential explanation; but maybe the cooling and subsequent separation of the forces is enough to explain why energy would clump.
+ScienceNinjaDude oh right, I forget that it's all just fields and forms of energy. The 'Spacetime' channels recent video on the nature of mass also helped, revealing mass as the 'emergent' property from kinetic and potential energy interactions. Okay, that works, thanks; I'll just take it as mass as an emergent phenomena of energy, and the rest is the manipulation of fields interacting with each other to produce the four fundamental forces. Matter as we know it then would be just energy and fields manipulated like origami into unique particle forms, relating back to the Big Bang and that 'spontaneous symmetry breaking' or whatever which broke up the fellowship of the forces.
The planet-like picture of atoms is misleading -- electrons do orbit nuclei, but due to quantum physics, the orbit(al)s do not look much like planetary orbits until you get way up in the ladder of energy states (much higher than any obtainable atom in its ground state).
Great explanation! But could you tell us why the light doesn't passes through all kinds of matter?
Alex de Melo because the light interacts with the electrons in the matter. The electron is normally promoted to a higher energy shell and the photon is absorbed. If the photon doesn’t not have the energy to promote an electron; then it will just pass straight through; as it does with glass. Check out one of the videos on why glass is transparent they will also explain why most materials are not
@@markgatenby2991 thank you!
So, molecules are different but from an atomic level, my atoms are the same as the atoms making up a wall. How come that they don't rearrange themselves when close by? Or do they, in really, at a v v low level?
You could have added that the components of atoms are force fields of themselves too (quarks, gluons, photons) and point like, so dimensionless. That would have made it even cooler. In the end, matter is energy as Einstein already figured out through non-quantum derivations.
Kirk: "It seems to be a sentient being composed entirely of energy!"
Spock: "Aren't we all?"
Zoom to Spock's face with eyebrow raised. Cue drama theme and cut to commercial.
"Lemon Pledge very pretty,
Puts the shine down Lemon good.
Lemon Pledge as you're dusting,
Brings new luster to the wood."
How matter interacts with antimatter at the subatomic level ?
- So if electron force fields give matter particles their size & keeps them apart, Why isnt all mater a gas. How come it's forced apart and yet sticks together to form solids?
Do you mean that electrons in one atom repels electrons in other atoms thus making them solid
Really surprised you didn't remove all that noise before uploading. It's very distracting. I found myself listening to the noise more than what you were saying, not because I like noise, just that it was distracting. If you don't know how to remove it. Audacity is a free program. Record 5 sec room noise, select it, effect, noise reduction, click get noise sample (somehting like that) select your main vocal track, click effect, noise reduction and ok. All that noise will be gone.
LOL is that what you call it
I thought there was no “empty space”. Though the electrons were a cloud of probability of where the electron would be, or the wave function, obeying Schrödinger’s equation, so that the electron was everywhere?
the electron is not everywhere but the electron could be anywhere with a certain probability.
because the probability of finding an electron is never actually zero.
The probability distribution covered the entire atom though, but it can still be considered empty.
100,000³ (cubed) for volume 10^15th... But that range is also the electron-mass-energy-vs-Coulombic-force-times-distance-work-energy, equivalence-range... where atoms abut each other... But, solidification exists not-by distance, but by, multi-electron interactions, among multiple atoms (it takes two to make a solid) and at close range the electrons fit to fill only certain positions with respect to their atoms and to each other... so, in chemistry, there are rules-about octets and hybrids and sigma bonds and pi bonds and singlets and triplets....
sir, but empty space is not empty right? its all about the gluon's field., based on quarks theory
Even nuclei themselves are (almost only) empty space an their mass, which is most of the mass we experience, is nothing but another type of "force field", that of nuclear strong force.
Planck's mass m=2.17*10^-8 is origin of mass, under gravity g=6.67*10^-11 vacuum potential energy ch=(4.9)^3*pm=(2*3.14)gm^2 form a black hole at Planck's length l=1.6*10^-35=gm/c^2, h=6.62*10^-34, c=299792458, then this Planck's black hole expanse to proton's scale pl=8.85*10^-16 grain proton's mass pm=1.67*10^-27=pl*c^2/(4.18*g(p)), g(p) is ratio of strong force to gravity (m/pm)^2*g=1.13*10^28.
4:51 "force field of the wall repel my force field". Liquids and gases also have force fields, why are we able to go through those?
In liquids and gasses individual atoms and/or molecules aren't bound to the sertain position. So then force fields repelling each other atoms have place where to go. As Archimedes state then you put the sertain volume of materian in to the water - you pull out the same volume of water.
Question, lets say a radioactive atom undergoes spontaneous decay. First, is that even possible without an initiating driver like a collision with another particle? Second, when the fission occurs, could a photon which is massless be released. The answer is probably yes, so then the total mass must surely decrease even though the total energy has not decreased. So does that mean that mass is not conserved and only energy is conserved? Isnt any conversion from a mass particle to photons a deviation of conservation of mass, which suggests that conservation of mass is not a law?
...If it's called a "Law" then its part of classical physics. And that usually has limitations. Within certain parameters, those Laws are accurate. Your example goes outside those parameters.
In modern physics, we use the word "Theory" instead of "Law".
The word Theory (just like the word Law) doesn't mean "hypothesis" in physics. It refers to an idea that can be replicated and predicted accurately.
So you'll have the Law of Gravity and the Theory of Gravity.
Don't forget that mass and energy are interchangeable and neither can either be created or destroyed. They may change states but the amount of energy/mass remains unchanged
The answer to all of your questions is "yes and no." Firstly, while nuclei undergo spontaneous decay without the need of any collision, it's not entirely accurate to say that they do so without any driving force: The weak nuclear force is responsible for spontaneous decay.
Secondly, the laws of conservation of matter and conservation of energy can be thought of as laws of chemistry and/or classical mechanics. In particle physics, quantum physics, string theory, etc., the two laws are combined into the law of conservation of matter and energy, which states that matter and energy can change forms but cannot be created or destroyed within the universe. (Technically, energy can come into the universe via the expansion of spacetime, which is thought to be the source of dark energy, but it's not actually being created inside the universe.) This combined conservation law is similar to combined symmetries (and, in fact, was first formulated in response to a mathematical symmetry). (What I mean is that it is mathematically similar to the fact that any one or two of chiral, parity, and time symmetry can be violated, but the combined CPT symmetry cannot and still have the universe work the way ours apparently does.) With this combined conservation law, mass from the nucleus can be converted into energy in the form of photons (with the relation E=mc², of course) or even in the form of other particles (especially α and β particles) with the difference between the mass of the original nucleus and the combined masses of the new nucleus and the particle being similarly equated to the energy necessary to accelerate the departing particle (at such speeds, probably using the more complicated version of E=mc², which is Eᵣ=√((m₀c²)²+(pc)²), because p (momentum) = mv, and the rest energy of the system is being converted into kinetic energy in the moving particles).
And that's still a massive oversimplification. (I didn't even mention the production of W and Z bosons!) Basically, this stuff is seriously complicated, and often what seems at first glance to be a violation of the laws of physics as you know them is simply the result of the fact that you don't know the laws of physics as well as you thought. (That's not meant as an insult in any way, btw. Most of it goes _waaaaaaay_ over my head as well. Your question just happened to hit on something I actually _did_ know.)
Interference, ten yards.
But seriously, do solids tremble at the speed of light?